The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Cyber Command may soon watch over us > Comments

Cyber Command may soon watch over us : Comments

By Peter Coates, published 10/11/2006

The US appears to be planning to intensify its worldwide surveillance of communications, including the Internet, as part of the War on Terror.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
This is a logical extension of the aggregation of all media ownership into the hands of a few mega wealthy individuals whose aim is to preserve the status quo. At the beginning of last century in the USA there were hundreds, if not thousands of totally independent newspapers giving readers a balanced set of opinions and facts. Today they have been reduced to a handful of self-censoring outlets peddling mainstream current political opinion. The identical thing has occurred in Australia. Hundreds of independent newspapers have been reduced to three right-wing, conservative publications - Fairfax, Murdock and PBL [and Fairfax might soon be gone.]
Having gained total control of Newspapers and TV, the internet is the next logical step for the globalists to take to prevent the spread of information.
Posted by ybgirp, Friday, 10 November 2006 10:13:54 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ybgirp, I couldn't agree more with your comment, except that your position on the left-right political spectrum must be extremely far to the left for you to consider Fairfax as being right-wing and conservative. From my position on the spectrum, Fairfax looks extremely left-wing and not conservative.
Posted by Maximus, Friday, 10 November 2006 12:04:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yeah, Fairfax isn't quite the same as the other media empires - no centralised ownership for starters, as well as a distinctly separate political flavour.

As for this article...

Hmm. Kind of stupid to cede this to the air force, reeks of old world thinking. I would have thought intelligence agencies would be more appropriate.

Internet warfare wouldn't be anything like conventional warfare, as this is a flow of information. On the most brutally simplistic terms, any area of internet use could be blacked out with an EMP and no doubt thanks to satellite technology that kind of strike is easier.

Presumably as the internet spreads it's tentacles outward, we'll actually see fewer critical assets accessible online. Utilities such as power, water etc would be kept with separate digital access so they can't be misused by savvy internet operators.

With critical assets offline I don't see how the internet will be a whole lot more than a communication tool (in the context of actual combat) so the real skills will be tracking and identifying individuals and information, and also the use of misinformation.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Friday, 10 November 2006 2:10:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
TurnRightThen Left

I agree that CIVILIAN intelligence agencies are bettor suited to the domestic security role including interception and datamining. I think the interception role and computer hardware have grown under defence umbrellas (eg NSA and DSD in Australia) partially because the cost and precise nature of their activities can be better shielded from public (and enemy) view.

The NSA and USAF Intelligence actually have positive reasons to keep the enemy's (including "terrorists") internet and broader communications going during some phases of War on Terror to:
- monitor enemy intentions, reactions
- most critically when might a rogue state (or even Hezbollah) launch a large missile or
- when might an al Qaeda type body launch another 9/11 scale attack?

I think a problem is should a USAF Cyber Command try to reinvent the wheel and increasingly militarise the War on Terror which is usually means comes down to smaller scale domestic security.

I don't know whether the critical assets you mention can safely go offline (hackers and agencies can find a way) but I think we can agree that uniformed interception agencies and a military ethos are no way to handle the biggest terrorism problem, which is probably homegrown.
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 10 November 2006 3:12:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Precursor to Cyberspace Command already at PINE GAP?
Here's an update to the article (written 3 weeks ago):

The Air Force Cyberspace Command (AFCC) was announced by the Secretary of the Air Force on November 2, 2006.

This new command will be drawn from the 67th Network Warfare Wing as well as other resources of the Eighth Air Force working out of Louisiana's Barksdale Air Force Base.

"The 67th Network Warfare Wing is charged with executing Air Intelligence Agency's global mission of information operations. As the [US] Air Force's largest operational wing and only intelligence wing, it has people or equipment on every continent except Antarctica. The wing is composed of five intelligence groups, 35 squadrons and detachments and more than 8,000 people serving at some 100 locations around the world to provide information to today's leaders to help shape global events." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/67th_Network_Warfare_Wing

Within the Pacific (and almost certainly including Pine Gap) Cyberspace Command will be responsible for signals interception and early warning intelligence work - an integral part of the Missile Defence "Star Wars" Program. 67th Network Warfare Wing personnel are almost certainly at Pine Gap already along with NSA types. Meanwhile units of USAF Space Command at Pine Gap control spy satellites watching for any hostile missile launches and many other items of interest.

Pine Gap consists of ground stations and satellites capable of intercepting "sucking up" information from most areas on the planet. This information is usually hard to obtain in a timely way, or commercially encypted or encrypted by surrounding governments. For the US Government to make use of such information most of it would be forwarded from the Gap to NSA headquarters at Fort Meade, USA, for decryption.

I'd argue that the Missile Defence aspect of the future Cyberspace Command is good for Australia's defence. What do you reckon?
Posted by plantagenet, Saturday, 11 November 2006 4:40:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The whole issue of pine gap is a contentious one, or at least, if we knew more about it, it should be.

Yes, I suppose on the face of it, it is good for our defence insofar as the US isn't going to allow it's closest ally in the southern hemisphere to be compromised, especially seeing as they are relying on their facilities here for information.

That being said... I can't help but wonder if their presence here compromises our own ability to make decisions solely in the Australian interest.

I haven't considered all the angles, overall I can't see too much problem from a strategic standpoint - our having pine gap here is a favour to the US, and as such it doesn't make us indebted to them, quite the opposite, though regardless of how many favours we do, ultimately, if it comes down to a decision that will benefit the US at the expense of Australia, the US will always put themselves first. It's only natural.

In straightforward military terms, this kind of clash is unlikely to happen. In economic terms however, if Australia opted for something along the lines of state ownership of resources such as uranium, we may have a problem. Once again, notlikely to happen any time soon, but as resources become a more crucial issue, particularly energy resources, Australia may find itself in a precarious position due to the fact that we have so much, with so few people.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Sunday, 12 November 2006 1:52:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy